us101 candlestick psr f · defer action, pending additional information or further staff analysis....

M:\Meetings\Memo to CAC\2011\04-Apr 2011\US101 Candlestick PSR F.doc of 3

Memorandum

Date: 04.21.11 RE: Citizens Advisory Committee April 27, 2011

To: Citizens Advisory Committee

From: Tilly Chang – Deputy Director for Planning

Maria Lombardo – Chief Deputy Director for Policy and Programming

Subject: ACTION – Adopt a Motion of Support for the Appropriation of $55,000 in Prop K Funds for the US101 Candlestick Interchange Project Study Report, Subject to the Attached Fiscal Year Cash Flow Distribution Schedule

Summary

The US101 Candlestick Interchange Re-Configuration Project is one of several projects identified by the Authority and its partner agencies in San Francisco and San Mateo County as a shared high-priority investment that is needed to address existing and future needs in the Visitacion Valley/Bi-County area. Authority staff have presented on this and other recommended high-priority projects emerging from the Bi-County Transportation Study at the Citizen Advisory Committee’s February and October 2010 meetings, as well as at numerous community meetings. In parallel with the Bi-County Transportation Study, the City of Brisbane is leading a Project Study Report (PSR), the initial alternatives analysis and project appraisal document that is required for a project proposed on the state highway system. To date, the PSR expenses of $611,000 have been funded by developer contributions, including sponsors of the San Francisco Southeast Waterfront and Brisbane Baylands projects. The California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) has recently begun requiring reimbursement for its staff time to provide oversight on projects such as the Candlestick Interchange. As a result, the project budget is in need of an additional $110,000 (or 15% of the total estimated budget of $721,000) to fund Caltrans’ remaining review of the PSR. The San Mateo County Transportation Authority approved $55,000 (or 50%) for this expense in February 2011, contingent upon a similar amount to be provided from San Francisco. We are seeking a motion of support for the appropriation of $55,000 in Prop K funds for the US101 Candlestick Interchange PSR, subject to the attached Fiscal Year Cash Flow Distribution Schedule.

BACKGROUND

The Prop K Expenditure Plan created the Visitacion Valley Watershed category to support transportation investments in the southeastern corner of San Francisco to address existing and future needs associated with additional land development, but it did not identify specific projects. Toward this end, the Authority has been leading the Bi-County Transportation Study, a cooperative effort to build consensus among agencies in San Francisco and San Mateo counties on a set of transportation project investments to support the envisioned growth in the area, anticipated to occur on both sides of the San Francisco/San Mateo county line, and on a funding plan for those projects that draws upon both public and private contributions. The US101 Candlestick Interchange Re-Configuration Project is one of several projects identified by the Authority and its partner agencies in San Francisco and San Mateo County as a shared high-priority investment that is needed to address existing and future needs in the Visitacion Valley/Bi-County area. Authority staff have presented on this and other recommended high-priority projects emerging from the Bi-County Transportation Study at the Citizens Advisory Committee’s February and October 2010 meetings, as well as at numerous community meetings.

Concurrently, to support its own growth plans, the City of Brisbane has been leading the development of a project to re-configure the US101 Candlestick Interchange, which straddles the border between


San Francisco and the City of Brisbane. The project would replace the existing US101 Candlestick Interchange with a new ramp system that provides more efficient and direct access to the freeway and a new local street crossing of US101, to be called Harney Way/Geneva Avenue. Transportation agencies in San Mateo County, including the City/County Association of Governments of San Mateo County (C/CAG) and the San Mateo County Transportation Authority, have previously identified the Candlestick Interchange project in the Regional Transportation Plan (T2035) and in San Mateo County’s 2004 Measure A Expenditure Plan. The City of Brisbane is nearing completion of the conceptual feasibility stage of the project development, called a Project Study Report (PSR). The subject appropriation would match a $55,000 contribution of Measure A sales tax funds from the San Mateo County Transportation Authority to complete this phase.

The purpose of this memorandum is to present our request for appropriation of $55,000 in Prop K funds for the US101 Candlestick Interchange PSR and to seek a motion of support to appropriate the funds as requested.

DISCUSSION

Project Scope and Benefits: The Candlestick Interchange project would replace the current ramp system with a more compact, higher-capacity interchange. It would construct a new crossing of US101, allowing the current crossing – Alana Way – to be re-purposed for multimodal use. Two alternatives are under consideration: bringing the new crossing, to be called Geneva Avenue, over US101, or under.

The project design would accommodate multimodal facilities that would be constructed as separate projects, for the portion of those facilities falling within the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) right-of-way. Traffic currently utilizing the existing Alana Way tunnel crossing of US101 to access south-bound US101 is expected to be diverted to the new Geneva Avenue Extension/Harney Way connections to the freeway. This will allow Alana Way to be re-designed as a proposed bus rapid transit (BRT) and pedestrian-bicycle facility. The BRT facility would utilize exclusive lanes as it approaches US101 from the east on Harney Way, using Alana tunnel to cross US101, and continuing to the Bayshore Caltrain Station and beyond via one of several routing options including a new Geneva Road extension project through Brisbane. The project design would also accommodate pedestrian and bicycle travel, both on the new Geneva Avenue and via an exclusive bicycle-pedestrian path in the Alana Way tunnel, adjacent to the BRT facility. On the west side of US101, the bicycle-pedestrian path would connect to Geneva Avenue, the Bayshore Intermodal Station, and to the future Bay Trail that is expected to be constructed as part of the proposed Brisbane Baylands land development (see map provided in Attachment 1 to the Allocation Request Form).

Current Phase of Work: The requested appropriation will fund the completion of the PSR, the initial alternatives analysis and project appraisal document required by Caltrans for projects proposed on the state highway system. The City of Brisbane is serving as lead agency for the PSR and estimates the effort to be 85% complete currently.

To date, the PSR expenses of $611,000 have been funded by two private land development companies with intentions to implement major land developments in the area, Lennar Corporation and Universal Paragon Corporation. The remaining work entails Caltrans staff review of the Draft PSR document and project team responses to Caltrans comments in advance of submittals for final approval of the PSR. Caltrans has recently changed its policy for providing oversight on locally sponsored efforts such as this PSR to require that the local sponsor reimburse Caltrans for staff time expended on oversight. Caltrans has estimated that remaining oversight for this project will cost $110,000. The requested Prop K funds would provide 50% of this reimbursement cost (15% of the new, increased PSR total budget).


The San Mateo County Transportation Authority, the administrating agency for the San Mateo County Measure A sales tax, provided $55,000 to the PSR effort, contingent upon an equal contribution from the Authority, on February 3, 2011, as Resolution 2011-2.

The requested Prop K funds would be used by the City of Brisbane, via a memorandum of agreement with the Transportation Authority, to reimburse Caltrans for its staff time providing oversight on project development as per Brisbane’s Cooperative Agreement with Caltrans.

Brisbane staff anticipates Caltrans approval of the PSR by December 2011. Completion of the PSR enables the project to be programmed for state and federal funding, and to seek further Caltrans and environmental approvals. At the same time, San Mateo and San Francisco agencies are discussing advancing a feasibility study for the Harney Way/Geneva Avenue BRT and bicycle facility project, which would traverse San Francisco, Brisbane and Daly City as described above. The steps for these actions are being scoped as part of the Implementation and Funding Plan for the Bi-County Transportation Study, which should be completed by Summer 2011.

We are seeking a motion of support for the appropriation of $55,000 in Prop K funds for the US101 Candlestick Interchange PSR, subject to the attached Fiscal Year Cash Flow Distribution Schedule.

ALTERNATIVES

1. Adopt a motion of support for the appropriation of $55,000 in Prop K funds for the US101 Candlestick Interchange PSR, subject to the attached Fiscal Year Cash Flow Distribution Schedule.

2. Adopt a motion of support for the appropriation of $55,000 in Prop K funds for the US101 Candlestick Interchange PSR, subject to the attached Fiscal Year Cash Flow Distribution Schedule, with modifications.

3. Defer action, pending additional information or further staff analysis.

FINANCIAL IMPACTS

This action would appropriate $55,000 in Prop K funds for the US101 Candlestick Interchange PSR. To date, no other funding has been allocated from a total $1,000,000 programmed in Fiscal Year 2010/11 for the Bi-County and Visitacion Valley Watershed project, which leaves sufficient funds to accommodate the current request. The appropriation would be subject to the Fiscal Year Cash Flow Distribution Schedule contained in the attached Allocation Request Form. The recommended cash flow is consistent with the Prop K Strategic Plan, and as such, will not trigger the need for additional financing beyond that already assumed in the Strategic Plan.

RECOMMENDATION

Adopt a motion of support for the appropriation of $55,000 in Prop K funds for the US101 Candlestick Interchange PSR, subject to the attached Fiscal Year Cash Flow Distribution Schedule. Attachments

1. Allocation Request Form 2. Prop K Capital Budget 3. Prop K Fiscal Year Cash Flow Distribution – Summary Table

San Francisco County Transportation AuthorityProposition K Sales Tax Program Allocation Request Form

FY of Allocation Action: 2010/11

Project Name:

Implementing Agency:

EXPENDITURE PLAN INFORMATION

Category:

Subcategory:

EP Project/Program:

EP Line Number (Primary): 27 Current Request:

Other EP Line Numbers: Supervisorial District(s):

Gray cells will automatically be filled in.

See attached Word document.

$55,000

US101 Candlestick Interchange Re-Configuration Project Study Report

SCOPE

San Francisco County Transportation Authority

C. Street & Traffic Safety

10

i. Major Capital Projects (Streets)

b.3 Visitacion Valley Watershed Area projects (San Francisco share)

Sufficient scope detail should be provided to allow Authority staff to evaluate the reasonableness of the proposed budget and schedule. If there are prior allocations for the same project, provide an update on progress. Long scopes may be provided in a separate Word file. Maps, drawings, etc. should be provided on Worksheet 7-Maps.or by inserting additional worksheets.

Project sponsors shall provide a brief explanation of how the project was prioritized for funding, highlighting: 1) project benefits, 2) level of public input into the prioritization process, and 3) whether the project is included in any adopted plans, including Prop K 5-Year Prioritization Program (5YPPs). Justify any inconsistencies with the adopted Prop K Strategic Plan and/or relevant 5YPPs.

Indicate whether work is to be performed by outside consultants and/or by force account.

P:\Prop K\FY1011\ARF Final\SFCTA US101 Candlestick Interchange PSR, 1-Scope :FY 10/11 Page 1 of 11

US101 Candlestick Interchange Re-Configuration Project Study Report Scope of Work April 18, 2011

Background The project consists of re-configuring the US101 Candlestick Interchange, including a new ramp system and a new local street crossing of US101, to be called Harney Way / Geneva Avenue. The Candlestick project has been identified as a key transportation investment to support future land development in the area on both sides of the San Francisco and San Mateo County Line. As such, it is currently included in the Metropolitan Transportation Commission’s Transportation 2035 Plan and San Mateo County’s Measure A Expenditure Plan. It is also identified as a Tier 1 priority project within the Bi-County Transportation Study, a joint effort led by the Transportation Authority in partnership with other San Francisco agencies, San Mateo County agencies and Caltrans. The existing US101 ramps to and from Harney Way and Alana Way have limited capacity to serve freeway-related traffic in their current ramp intersection configurations. If travel demand increases, as is expected with the major land developments proposed and already underway, the existing ramp system will experience high traffic congestion, which will not only delay motorists, but also create difficult conditions for operating reliable transit service and increase conflicts with pedestrians and bicyclists, all of which have no other option but to use Alana Way to cross US101. The project would replace the current ramp system with a compact diamond interchange. The project would construct a new crossing of US101, allowing the current crossing – Alana Way – to be re-purposed for multi-modal use. The new crossing would become a portion of the future Geneva Avenue on the west side of US101 and connect with Harney Way on the east side, providing a local intersection connection for the new US101 interchange ramps. Geneva Avenue would be constructed as a six-lane street with bike lanes and sidewalks in both directions. Two alternatives are being considered: bringing Geneva Avenue over US101, or under. Several related multi-modal transportation projects would rely on work to be completed by the Candlestick Interchange project. A separate project, not part of this effort, would extend Geneva Avenue on the west side of US101 from the Candlestick Interchange to its current terminus at Bayshore Boulevard. Another project will re-construct and widen Harney Way on the east side of US101. An additional project would provide new pedestrian-bicycle connections linking multiple key destinations and regional network facilities in the area. Finally, a new Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) service would utilize the BRT facility described below, the full line of which would extend from Hunters Point Shipyard to Bayshore Intermodal Caltrain Station and, eventually, Balboa Park BART/Muni Station. The Candlestick Interchange project design would accommodate these multimodal facilities. The existing Alana Way tunnel crossing of US101, currently used for mixed-flow vehicle traffic but to be abandoned once traffic shifts to the new Geneva Avenue, would be re-purposed for a Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) and pedestrian-bicycle facility. The BRT facility would utilize exclusive lanes as it approaches the US101 from the east on Harney Way, using through the Alana tunnel to cross US101, west of which it would continue either as dedicated lanes along Geneva Avenue or on a

separate exclusive busway. The project design would also accommodate pedestrian and bicycle travel, on the new Geneva Avenue as described above and via an exclusive bicycle-pedestrian path in the Alana Way tunnel, adjacent to the BRT facility. On the west side of US101, the bicycle-pedestrian path would connect to Geneva Avenue, the Bayshore Intermodal Station, and to the future Bay Trail that is expected to be constructed as part of the proposed Brisbane Baylands land development. Current-Phase Scope of Work This appropriation would fund the completion of a Project Study Report (PSR), the initial approval document required by California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) for projects proposed on the state highway system. Following Caltrans approval of the PSR (anticipated by December 2011), the next steps for the project would be a Project Report, accompanying environmental impact review process, and detailed engineering design. The schedule beyond the PSR is still conceptual, but the Project Report could begin in 2012 and be completed in 2015. The City of Brisbane is serving as lead agency for the PSR and currently estimates the effort to be 80% complete, with the following draft products already submitted for Caltrans review:

Traffic Operations Analysis Preliminary Environmental Assessment Advance Planning Study Draft Project Study Report document, including Design Exceptions and Life Cycle Cost

Analysis The remaining work entails Caltrans staff review of the above-listed Draft PSR document items and project team responses to Caltrans comments in advance of submittals for final approval of the PSR. This Prop K appropriation request would be used by the City of Brisbane, via a memorandum of agreement with the Authority, to reimburse Caltrans for its staff time required to complet the PSR, per Brisbane’s Cooperative Agreement with Caltrans (see attachment). Caltrans has recently changed its policy for providing oversight on locally sponsored projects to require that the local sponsor reimburse Caltrans for staff time spent on oversight. Caltrans has estimated that remaining oversight for this project will cost $110,000. The $55,000 in requested Prop K funds would match $55,000 in San Mateo County Measure A sales tax funds allocated for this project to the City of Brisbane from the San Mateo County Transportation Authority on February 3, 2011, via Resolution 2011-2.


FY 2010/11

Project Name:


ENVIRONMENTAL CLEARANCE

Type : Completion Date

(mm/dd/yy)

Status:

Start Date End DateQuarter Fiscal Year Quarter Fiscal Year

1 2006/07 2 2011/123 2011/12 4 2014/151 2015/16 1 2016/171 2015/16 3 2016/17

Prepare Bid Documents 4 2017/18 1 2018/192 2018/19 N/A N/A4 2018/19 N/A N/A

N/A N/AProject Closeout (i.e., final expenses incurred) 4 2022/23 4 2022/23

Project Study Report Schedule (PSR): Begin: July 2006 - Complete: December 2011 Note: The schedule beyond the PSR is conceptual and will be refined as the project progresses.


SCHEDULE COORDINATION/NOTES


EIR/EIS

Environmental Studies (PA&ED)

PROJECT DELIVERY MILESTONES

Not yet prepared 07/01/14

Enter dates for ALL project phases, not just for the current request. Use July 1 as the start of the fiscal year. Use 1, 2, 3, 4 to denote quarters and XXXX/XX for the fiscal year (e.g. 2010/11). Additional schedule detail may be provided in the text box below.

Provide project delivery milestones for each sub-project included in the current request, if appropriate. Describe coordination with other project schedules or external deadlines (e.g., obligation deadlines) that impact the project schedule, if relevant.

Design Engineering (PS&E)

Planning/Conceptual Engineering

Start Procurement (e.g. rolling stock)Project Completion (i.e., Open for Use)

R/W Activities/Acquisition

Advertise ConstructionStart Construction (e.g., Award Contract)

P:\Prop K\FY1011\ARF Final\SFCTA US101 Candlestick Interchange PSR, 2-Schedule :FY 10/11 Page 2 of 11


FY 2010/11

Project Name:


COST SUMMARY BY PHASE - CURRENT REQUEST

Cost for Current Request/Phase

Yes/No Total CostYes

COST SUMMARY BY PHASE - ENTIRE PROJECT

Total Cost Source of Cost Estimate$721,000

$29,400,000$29,400,000$7,000,000

$196,000,000$0

$262,521,000 Expected Useful Life: 50 Years Enter expected useful life of completed capital

project (e.g., use audit number).

$721,000 $55,000

Allocations will generally be for one phase only. Multi-phase allocations will be considered on a case-by-case basis.

Enter the total cost for the phase or partial phase (must be a useful segment, e.g. Islais Creek Phase 1 construction) covered by the CURRENT Prop K request.

Show total cost for ALL project phases based on best available information. Source of cost estimate (e.g. 35% design, vendor quote) is intended to help gauge the quality of the cost estimate, which should improve in reliability the farther along a project is in its development.

$55,000


ConstructionProcurement (e.g. rolling stock)

$721,000



Prop K - Current Request

R/W Activities/Acquisition

Environmental Studies (PA&ED)Design Engineering (PS&E)R/W Activities/Acquisition

Planning/Conceptual EngineeringEnvironmental Studies (PA&ED)

Total:

Project Study Report

Actual costs incurred, and Caltrans estimateEstimated at 15% of Construction costEstimated at 15% of Construction costProject Study Report

Design Engineering (PS&E)

ConstructionProcurement (e.g. rolling stock)

P:\Prop K\FY1011\ARF Final\SFCTA US101 Candlestick Interchange PSR, 3-Cost :FY 10/11 Page 3 of 11


MAJOR LINE ITEM BUDGET

Item Total CostProfessional services to produce Project Study Report (not part of this request) $611,000 Caltrans staff time reimbursement* $110,000

Total $721,000

1. Provide a major line item budget, with subtotals by phase. More detail is required the farther along the project is in the development phase. Planning studies should provide task-level budget information. 2. Requests for project development should include preliminary estimates for later phases such as construction. 3. Support costs and contingencies should be called out in each phase, as appropriate. Provide both dollar amounts and % (e.g. % of construction) for support costs and contingencies. 4. For work to be performed by agency staff rather than consultants, provide base rate, overhead multiplier, and fully burdened rates by position with FTE (full-time equivalent) ratio. A sample format is provided below. 5. For construction costs, please include budget details. A sample format is provided below. Please note if work will be performed through a contract. 6. For any contract work, please provide the LBE/SBE/DBE goals as applicable to the contract.

* See attached Co-Operative Agreement between the City of Brisbane and Caltrans for an overview of Caltrans's scope of work and documentation of its cost estimate.

P:\Prop K\FY1011\ARF Final\SFCTA US101 Candlestick Interchange PSR, 4-Major Line Item Budget :FY 10/11 Page 4 of 11


FY

Project Name:


FUNDING PLAN - FOR CURRENT PROP K REQUEST

Prop K Funds Requested:

5-Year Prioritization Program Amount: (enter if appropriate)

Strategic Plan Amount for Requested FY:

Programmed$55,000

$55,000

Actual Leveraging - This Phase:Expected Leveraging per Expenditure Plan Total from Cost worksheet67.60%

$0

92.37%


$0

$0

Total:

$0

$721,000$0

$666,000

$721,000

$0$0

$611,000 $611,000$0

$55,000$55,000$55,000

$55,000


$1,000,000

Allocated TotalPlanned

The 5-Year Prioritization Program (5YPP) amount is the entire amount of Prop K funds available for allocation in Fiscal Year 2010/11 for Bi-County & Visitacion Valley Watershed Improvements in the 2009 5YPP for New and Upgraded Streets. The Strategic Plan amount is the Fiscal Year 2010/11 amount for the entire Visitacion Valley Watershed category, including $1,000,000 in Fiscal Year 2010/11 funds and $1,000,000 in unallocated Fiscal Year 2009/10 funds.

Fund Source

$2,000,000

If the amount requested is inconsistent (e.g., greater than) with the Strategic Plan amount and/or the 5-Year Prioritization Program (5YPP), provide a justification in the space below including a detailed explanation of which other project or projects will be deleted, deferred, etc. to accommodate the current request and maintain consistency with the 5YPP and/or Strategic Plan annual programming levels.

Prop K sales tax

Developer ContributionsSan Mateo County "Measure A" Sales Tax

2010/11

Enter the funding plan for the phase or phases for which Prop K funds are currently being requested. Totals should match those shown on the Cost worksheet.

P:\Prop K\FY1011\ARF Final\SFCTA US101 Candlestick Interchange PSR, 5-Funding :FY 10/11 Page 5 of 11


Is Prop K providing local match funds for a state or federal grant? No

%

FUNDING PLAN - FOR ENTIRE PROJECT (ALL PHASES)

Programmed$55,000

$55,000

Actual Leveraging - Entire Project:Expected Leveraging per Expenditure Plan Total from Cost worksheet

FISCAL YEAR CASH FLOW DISTRIBUTION FOR CURRENT PROP K REQUEST

Prop K Funds Requested:

Sponsor Request - Proposed Prop K Cash Flow Distribution Schedule% Reimbursed

Annually

27.00%73.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%

FY 2010/11

Total:

FY 2011/12

$87,047,000Private Developer ContributionsSan Mateo "Measure A" Sales TaxProp K sales tax

Fiscal Year

$0

Total:

$0

$0

Allocated

$175,364,000

Enter the funding plan for all phases (environmental studies through construction) of the project. This section may be left blank if the current request covers all project phases. Totals should match those shown on the Cost worksheet.

Planned$55,000

Total

$55,000 $55,000

Fund Source

Fund Source $

Required Local Match

$0.00

$40,000

$0.00

$55,000

99.98%

$0

$262,521,000

$262,521,000

Balance

$0

Use the table below to enter the proposed cash flow distribution schedule (e.g. the maximum Prop K funds that are guaranteed to be available for reimbursement each fiscal year) for the current request. If the schedule is more aggressive than the Strategic Plan and/or 5YPP, please explain in the text box below how cash flow for other projects and programs will be slowed down to accommodate the current request without exceeding annual cash flow assumptions made in the Strategic Plan.

$55,000

$0$15,000

$0

$0

$40,000

$55,000

67.60%

Cash Flow

$ Amount

$175,364,000$87,047,000

$262,411,000

$0

$0

Other Public Funds

Note: Public and private contribution shares are as identified in the most recent version of the fair-share contribution analysis in Authority's draft BiCounty Transportation Study (April 2011).

P:\Prop K\FY1011\ARF Final\SFCTA US101 Candlestick Interchange PSR, 5-Funding :FY 10/11 Page 6 of 11


This section is to be completed by Authority Staff.

Last Updated: 04.19.11 Resolution. No. Res. Date:

Project Name:


Phase:Prop K Recommended: Appropriation

Total:

Cash Flow Distribution Schedule by Fiscal Year (for entire allocation/appropriation)EP

Line%

Reimbursable

27 27.00%27 73.00% 0.00% 0.00%

0.00%100%

Cash Flow Distribution Schedule by Fiscal Year & Phase (for entire allocation/appropriation)EP

Line Fiscal YearMaximum

Reimbursement

27 FY 2010/11 $15,00027 FY 2011/12 $40,000

$55,000

Prop K Fund Expiration Date: Eligible expenses must be incurred prior to this date.

$15,000

Fiscal Year

FY 2010/11

AUTHORITY RECOMMENDATION

Total:

Notes (e.g., justification for multi-phase recommendations, notes for multi-EP line item or multi-sponsor recommendations):

$55,000

$15,000 $40,000

Amount$55,000

$55,000

Total: $55,000$55,000

$55,000

6/30/2012

BalanceMaximum

Reimbursement


100%

Cumulative % Reimbursable

$0

$0$40,000

$0$0

FY 2011/12

100%

100%

100%


Phase

27%

$40,000




Balance

P:\Prop K\FY1011\ARF Final\SFCTA US101 Candlestick Interchange PSR, 6-Authority Rec :FY 10/11 Page 7 of 11


This section is to be completed by Authority Staff.

Last Updated: 04.19.11 Resolution. No. Res. Date:

Project Name:


AUTHORITY RECOMMENDATION



Action Fiscal Year PhaseFuture Commitment to:

Trigger:

Deliverables:1.

2.

3.

Special Conditions:1.

2.

3.

Notes:1.

2.

Supervisorial District(s):

10 7.63%

Sub-project detail? No If yes, see next page(s) for sub-project detail.

SFCTA Project Reviewer: Planning Project # from SGA:

Prop K proportion of expenditures - this phase:

Amount

Upon completion, provide a copy of the final Project Study Report.

The City of Brisbane may not incur expenses with the Prop K funds ($55,000) until Authority staff releases the funds pending execution of a MOA between the Authority and the City of Brisbane outlines the invoice process. (See Deliverable #1)

Executed Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) between the Authority and the City of Brisbane (anticipated June 2011) that outlines the invoice process.

P:\Prop K\FY1011\ARF Final\SFCTA US101 Candlestick Interchange PSR, 6-Authority Rec :FY 10/11 Page 8 of 11


MAPS AND DRAWINGS

P:\Prop K\FY1011\ARF Final\SFCTA US101 Candlestick Interchange PSR, 7-Maps.etc :FY 10/11 Page 9 of 11


P:\Prop K\FY1011\ARF Final\SFCTA US101 Candlestick Interchange PSR, 7-Maps.etc :FY 10/11 Page 10 of 11


FY of Allocation Action: 2010/11 Current Request:

Project Name:


Signatures

Project Manager Grants Section Contact

Name (typed):

Title:

Phone:

Fax:

Email:

Address:

Signature:

Date:


$55,000

100 Van Ness Ave., 26th Floor San Francisco, CA 94102

Ben Stupka

Senior Transportation Planner

415.522.4820

[email protected]

100 Van Ness Ave., 26th Floor San Francisco, CA 94102

Senior Transportation Planner

415.522.4804

[email protected]


Chester Fung

By signing below, we the undersigned verify that: 1) sales tax revenues shall be used to supplement and under no circumstance replace existing local revenues used for transportation purposes and 2) the requested sales tax funds will not be used to cover expenses incurred prior to Authority Board approval of the allocation.

P:\Prop K\FY1011\ARF Final\SFCTA US101 Candlestick Interchange PSR, 8-Signatures :FY 10/11 Page 11 of 11

Attachment 2.

Prop K FY 2010/11 Capital Budget1

EP # Sponsor Project Name Total FY 2010/11 FY 2011/12 FY 2012/13 FY 2013/14

1 SFCTABetter Market Street Planning and Environmental Review

790,000$ 790,000$

1 SFCTAVan Ness BRT EIR/EIS and Preliminary Engineering - Additional Funds

2,955,000$ 2,216,250$ 738,750$

1 SFMTA Van Ness BRT - Sewer Evaluation 99,000$ 49,500$ 49,500$

1 SFCTAGeary Bus Rapid Transit Environmental Analysis

1,647,515$ 329,503$ 823,758$ 494,255$

1 DPWBus Bulb at Balboa Street and 37th Avenue

35,000$ 17,500$ 17,500$

3 SFMTACentral Subway - Utility Relocation Contract 2

22,599,331$ 12,969,742$ 9,629,589$

7 PCJPB Caltrain Capital Planning 333,333$ 166,667$ 166,666$

7 PCJPBCaltrain Systemwide Station Improvements: State of Good Repair Program

6,667$ 6,667$

7 PCJPBCaltrain Systemwide Signal and Communication Improvements

97,000$ 97,000$

8 BART24th Street/Mission BART Plaza and

Pedestrian Improvements 4336,953$ 336,953$

16 SFMTA Automatic Fare Collection Program 3,060,000$ 1,561,024$ 780,512$ 718,464$

18 SFMTATrolleybus Wheelchair-Lift Incremental Operations and Maintenance

432,445$ 432,445$

20 SFMTACentral Control and Communications (C3) - Interim Facility

14,872,000$ 10,541,806$ 4,330,194$

22 SFMTAAdvanced Train Control System (ATCS) Final Cutover

763,666$ 687,300$ 61,093$ 15,273$

22 SFMTA Rail Procurement 1,000,000$ 45,600$ 801,600$ 95,000$ 57,800$

22 SFMTA Automatic Fare Collection Program 62,048$ -$ -$ 62,048$

22 SFMTA Bernal Substation Upgrade 188,000$ 94,000$ 94,000$

22 BARTPowell Street Station Water Intrusion Prevention

1,241,000$ 1,241,000$

50,518,958$ 30,341,957$ 18,734,162$ 1,385,040$ 57,800$

23 SFMTA Paratransit 9,670,000$ 9,670,000$

9,670,000$ 9,670,000$

17P PCJPB Rolling Stock Equipment3 953,161$ 953,161$

20M SFMTA Escalator Rehabilitation - Phase 2 300,000$ 150,000$ 150,000$

20P PCJPBCaltrain Systemwide Station Improvements: State of Good Repair Program

160,000$ 83,334$ 76,666$

22P PCJPB Caltrain Capital Planning 935,000$ 935,000$

Cash Flow Distribution

TRANSIT

Transit Subtotal

PARATRANSIT

Paratransit Subtotal

STREET AND TRAFFIC SAFETY

Capital Budget FY 1011 May Capital Budget - 1 Page 1 of 3

Attachment 2.




22P PCJPBCaltrain Systemwide Bridge Improvements Los Gatos Creek Bridge

93,333$ 93,333$

22P PCJPBCaltrain Systemwide Signal and Communication Improvements

502,047$ 232,047$ 180,000$ 90,000$

22P PCJPBCaltrain Systemwide Track Rehabilitation

254,112$ 58,412$ 195,700$

24 SFCTASouth Access to Golden Gate Bridge -

Doyle Drive 225,665,487$ 12,933,450$ 12,333,872$ 398,165$

27 SFCTA US 101 Candlestick Interchange PSR 55,000$ 15,000$ 40,000$

31 SFMTASunset Boulevard New Traffic Signals Local Match

45,000$ 20,000$ 25,000$

33 SFMTA Signal Modification Contract 33 317,000$ 200,000$ 117,000$

33 SFMTALight Rail Corridor Signal and Pavement Marking Improvements

98,755$ 39,502$ 59,252$

34 DPW 15th Avenue Pavement Renovation 2,480,000$ 980,000$ 1,500,000$

34 DPW 17th Street Pavement Renovation 320,000$ 320,000$

34 DPWParnassus Avenue Pavement Renovation

200,000$ 200,000$

35 DPW Street Repair and Cleaning Equipment 729,000$ 729,000$

37 SFMTA Bicycle Facility Maintenance 49,600$ 41,000$ 8,600$

37 DPW Public Sidewalk Repair 570,400$ 570,400$

38 SFMTATraffic Calming - Planning, Evaluation, and Outreach

508,000$ 213,750$ 294,250$

39 SFMTA Bicycle Safety Education Classes 165,000$ 82,500$ 82,500$

39 SFMTA Shared Roadway Bicycle Markings 240,000$ 240,000$

39 SFMTA JFK Drive Parking-Buffered Bikeway 112,000$ 112,000$

39 SFMTA Bicycle Facility Implementation 197,000$ 156,000$ 41,000$

39 SFMTA Bicycle Safety Education and Outreach 75,000$ 58,500$ 11,000$ 5,500$

39 SFMTA Bike to Work Day 80,000$ 25,000$ 55,000$

39 SFMTABicycle Facility Implementation 2 (Alemany, Portola)

160,000$ 130,000$ 30,000$

39 DPW Marina Green Bicycle Trail 14,400$ 10,800$ 3,600$

39 SFMTA 14th and Market Streets Curb Bulb 35,000$ 17,500$ 17,500$

39 SFMTABicycle Facility Implementation - FY 2010/11 BTA Local Match

47,000$ 10,000$ 37,000$

40 SFMTA Pedestrian Counting 25,000$ 25,000$

40 SFMTAConverting Standard Crosswalks to Continental Crosswalks

130,000$ 65,000$ 65,000$

40 SFMTA Red Visibility Curbs 30,000$ 15,000$ 15,000$


Attachment 2.




40 SFMTA School Crosswalk Maintenance 75,000$ 75,000$

40 SFMTA New Pedestrian Signals 214,000$ 128,000$ 86,000$

40 SFMTAMarina/Buchannan Closed Crosswalk Opening

97,000$ 19,400$ 77,600$

41 DPW Curb Ramps 763,000$ 22,890$ 740,110$

42 DPW Tree Planting and Maintenance 1,060,000$ 1,060,000$

37,755,295$ 20,197,646$ 17,063,983$ 493,665$

43 DOE Clean Air Program 188,100$ 188,100$

44 DCPCesar Chavez East Community Design Plan

54,076$ 54,076$

44 SFCTABayview Hunters Point Mobility Solutions Study

20,000$ 6,000$ 14,000$

44 DPWBroadway Street Streetscape Improvements Phase III

31,000$ 15,500$ 15,500$

44 DPWFolsom Street Streetscape Improvements

267,000$ 66,750$ 200,250$

44 DPWSecond Street Streetscape Improvements

35,000$ 8,750$ 26,250$

595,176$ 339,176$ 256,000$ -$ -$

TOTAL 98,539,429$ 60,548,779$ 36,054,145$ 1,878,705$ 57,800$

TSM/Strategic Initiatives Subtotal

Shaded lines indicate allocations/appropriations that are part of the current action.

3 PCJPB Rolling Stock Equipment: Resolution 11-23 (approved November 23, 2010) included a commitment to allocate $913,505 in Fiscal Year 2011/12 funds to fully fund San Francisco's local match share of this project.4 BART 24th Street/Mission BART Plaza and Pedestrian Improvements: Resolution 11-33 (approved December 14, 2010) included a commitment to allocate $303,047 in Fiscal Year 2011/12 funds to fully fund the design phase of this project.

1 This table shows Cash Flow Distribution Schedules for all FY 2010/11 allocations approved to date, along with the current recommended allocation(s).2 SFCTA South Access to Golden Gate Bridge - Doyle Drive: Resolution 10-63 (approved May 18, 2010) included a commitment to appropriate $25,665,487 in Fiscal Year 2010/11 and $5,397,165 in Fiscal Year 2011/12 funds for construction support services.

Streets and Traffic Safety Subtotal

TSM/STRATEGIC INITIATIVES


Attachment 3.

Prop K FY 2010/11 Capital Budget Summary1

Total FY 2010/11 FY 2011/12 FY 2012/13 FY2013/14Prior Allocations 98,484,429$ 60,533,779$ 36,014,145$ 1,878,705$ 57,800$ Current Request(s) 55,000$ 15,000$ 40,000$ -$ -$ New Total Allocations 98,539,429$ 60,548,779$ 36,054,145$ 1,878,705$ 57,800$


1 This table shows total cash flow for all FY 2010/11 allocations approved to date, along with the current recommended allocation(s).

Capital Budget FY 1011 May CF Summary - 1 Page 1 of 1